Dubbing Melodramas in the Arab World; Between the Standard Language and Colloquial Dialects

Elham Abdullah Ghobain

doi:doi:10.11648/j.allc.20170203.11

| Peer-Reviewed

Dubbing Melodramas in the Arab World; Between the Standard Language and Colloquial Dialects

Elham Abdullah Ghobain

Published in Arabic Language, Literature & Culture (Volume 2, Issue 3)

Received: 14 May 2017 Accepted: 6 June 2017 Published: 13 July 2017

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

This paper addresses the phenomenon of dubbing foreign non-Arab media content, particularly melodramas, using Arabic colloquial varieties instead of the Standard language. It attempts to discover what dialect or variety is preferred most by the participants included, and if the choices made were driven by any suggested criterion. The sample is randomly formed through a mainly quantitative online questionnaire, including 279 participants from Saudi Arabia. A good number of the sample opted for the Standard language over the colloquial varieties, and when they had to choose one from the colloquial, they opted for the Syrian dialect. The strong affinity to the Turkish soap opera, which achieved its success through the Syrian dialect, seems to nourish a more positive attitude toward the Syrian dialect compared to other dialects used and provided by the study, such as the Khaleeji, Hijazi, and Egyptian dialects. However, with foreign dramas other than the Turkish, whatever the criterion behind selecting certain varieties for dubbing, the Standard comes in at first place, then the Syrian. That is, the Khaleeji with the Indian drama, and the Hijazi with Korean drama are not favoured by the participants. This latter finding is interesting, since the Khaleeji and Hijazi are the participants’ own dialects (or those closest to them), yet were rejected nonetheless.

Published in	Arabic Language, Literature & Culture (Volume 2, Issue 3)
DOI	10.11648/j.allc.20170203.11
Page(s)	49-59
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2017. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Dubbing Non-arab Melodrama, Language Attitudes, Turkish Melodrama, Syrian Dialect, Standard Arabic, Arabic Colloquial Dialects, Cultural Juxtaposition

References

[1]	Al Khateeb, M. (2004) “Dubbed TV drama attracts more viewers than news bulletins”, in Al Hayat newspaper. 17/09/2014.
[2]	Al-Rashidy, M. “Saudi in Indian and Indian in Saudi!”, Alriyadh Newspaper, Available at http://www.alriyadh.com/494669, last accessed 1/1/2017. Translated.
[3]	Al-Rooqi, Th. (2010) “Indians and Turks Share the Screen”, in AlShams Arts Newspapers, available at http://www.shms.com.sa/html/story.php?id=8759, last accessed 19/12/2016. Translated.
[4]	AlSulmi, Th. (2012) “Dubbing the Korean Drama ‘Flowers Days’ Evokes Arab Viewrs’ Resentement Resentment”, Okaz Newspaper, available at http://www.okaz.com.sa/article/507691/ Resentment", in Okaz Newspapers, available at http://okaz.com.sa/article/507691/, last accessed 1/1/2017. Translated.
[5]	Baker, C. (1992) Attitudes and Language. Avon: Clevendon.
[6]	Bucholtz, M. and Hall, K. (2005) ‘Identity and Interaction: a Sociocultural Linguistic approach’, in Discourse Studies, 7(4–5): 585–614.
[7]	Cysouw, Michael and Jeff Good. (2013) ‘Languoid, Doculect, and Glossonym: Formalizing the Notion'Language'’, in Language Documentation and Conservation, 7, 331–359.
[8]	Gardner, R. C. (1985) Social Psychology and Second Language Learning. The Role of Attitudes and Motivation. London: Edward Arnold Ltd.
[9]	Gamal, M. (2009) ‘ Foreign movies in Egypt: Subtitling, dubbing and adaptation’, in A. Goldstein and B. Golubović Foreign language movies - dubbing vs. subtitling. Kovač.
[10]	Habayeb, H. (2012) “Doublage: An Imposed Culture and Aliased Life”, in Alqafila, Magazine, available at http://qafilah.com/ar/Available at http://qafilah.com/ar/ /, last accessed 10/5/2017. Translated.
[11]	Gibson, K. (2004) ‘English Only Court Cases Involving the U.S. Workplace: The myths of language use and the homogenization of bilingual workers’ Identities’, in Second Language Studies, 22 (2), 1-60.
[12]	Hudson, R. (1996) Sociolinguistics. 2^nd ed. (Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics.) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[13]	Jaafar, A. (2008) ‘Dubbed Turkish soaps delight Arabs’, in Variety Magazine, available online at http://variety.com/2008/scene/markets-festivals/dubbed-turkish-soaps-delight-arabs-1117989166/, last accessed 4-12-2016.
[14]	Jenkins, R. (2004). Social Identity. New York, NY: Routledge.
[15]	Lefever, S., M. Dal, and Á. Matthíasdóttir (2007) ‘Online Data Collection in Academic Research: Advantages and Limitations’, in British Journal of Educational Technology, 38 (4), 574–582.
[16]	Meyerhoff, M. (2006) Introducing Sociolinguistics. Routledge.
[17]	Mujahid, A. (2010) “Indian Movies on MBC Dubbed into Kuwaiti Accent”, in Alrai Media Newspaper, available at, http://www.alraimedia.com/ar/article/arts/2010/01/25/170495/nr/nc, last accessed 1/1/2017. Translated.
[18]	Pavlenko, A. and A. Blackledge (2004) New theoretical approaches to the study of negotiation of identity in multilingual contexts. In: Pavlenko, A.. & A. Blackledge (eds.) Negotiation of identities in multilingual contexts. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters, pp. 1-33.
[19]	Spindle, B. (2011) “Why Harry Potter's Latest Trick Is to Speak a Syrian Dialect”, In The Wall Street Journal, available at http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702303661904576456580655391702, last accessed 4/12/2016.
[20]	Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2003). The past and future of mixed methods research: From data triangula- tion to mixed model designs. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (pp. 671-702). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
[21]	Teddlie, C. and F., Yu (2007) “Mixed Methods Sampling: A Typology With Examples”, in Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1 (1), 77-100.
[22]	Williams, N. (2013) “The Rise of Turkish Soap Power”, in BBC Magazine, Available at, http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-22282563, last accessed 2/1/2017.
[23]	“Hejazi Arabic”, 2014, In Wikipedia, available at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hejazi_Arabic#CITEREFMuhammad_Swaileh_A._Alzaidi2014, last accessed 1/1/2017.
[24]	Yule, G. (2010) The Study of Language. Cambridge University Press.
[25]	Baker, C. (1988) Key Issues in Bilingualism and Bilingual Education. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
[26]	Bassiouney, R. (2009) Arabic Sociolinguistics. Edinburg: Edinburgh University Press.
[27]	Richards, J., Platt, J. T., Platt, H. and Candlin, C. N. (1992) The Longman Dictionary of Applied Linguistics. (2^nd ed.). Harlow: Longman.
[28]	Spolsky, B. (1999). Second-language learning. In J. Fishman (Ed.), Handbook of language and ethnic identity (pp. 181-192). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[29]	Carbonaro, M. & Bainbridge, J. (2000) “Design and development of a process for web-based survey research”. The Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 46, 4, 392–394.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Elham Abdullah Ghobain. (2017). Dubbing Melodramas in the Arab World; Between the Standard Language and Colloquial Dialects. Arabic Language, Literature & Culture, 2(3), 49-59. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.allc.20170203.11

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Elham Abdullah Ghobain. Dubbing Melodramas in the Arab World; Between the Standard Language and Colloquial Dialects. Arab. Lang. Lit. Cult. 2017, 2(3), 49-59. doi: 10.11648/j.allc.20170203.11

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Elham Abdullah Ghobain. Dubbing Melodramas in the Arab World; Between the Standard Language and Colloquial Dialects. Arab Lang Lit Cult. 2017;2(3):49-59. doi: 10.11648/j.allc.20170203.11

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.allc.20170203.11,
  author = {Elham Abdullah Ghobain},
  title = {Dubbing Melodramas in the Arab World; Between the Standard Language and Colloquial Dialects},
  journal = {Arabic Language, Literature & Culture},
  volume = {2},
  number = {3},
  pages = {49-59},
  doi = {10.11648/j.allc.20170203.11},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.allc.20170203.11},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.allc.20170203.11},
  abstract = {This paper addresses the phenomenon of dubbing foreign non-Arab media content, particularly melodramas, using Arabic colloquial varieties instead of the Standard language. It attempts to discover what dialect or variety is preferred most by the participants included, and if the choices made were driven by any suggested criterion. The sample is randomly formed through a mainly quantitative online questionnaire, including 279 participants from Saudi Arabia. A good number of the sample opted for the Standard language over the colloquial varieties, and when they had to choose one from the colloquial, they opted for the Syrian dialect. The strong affinity to the Turkish soap opera, which achieved its success through the Syrian dialect, seems to nourish a more positive attitude toward the Syrian dialect compared to other dialects used and provided by the study, such as the Khaleeji, Hijazi, and Egyptian dialects. However, with foreign dramas other than the Turkish, whatever the criterion behind selecting certain varieties for dubbing, the Standard comes in at first place, then the Syrian. That is, the Khaleeji with the Indian drama, and the Hijazi with Korean drama are not favoured by the participants. This latter finding is interesting, since the Khaleeji and Hijazi are the participants’ own dialects (or those closest to them), yet were rejected nonetheless.},
 year = {2017}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Dubbing Melodramas in the Arab World; Between the Standard Language and Colloquial Dialects
AU  - Elham Abdullah Ghobain
Y1  - 2017/07/13
PY  - 2017
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.allc.20170203.11
DO  - 10.11648/j.allc.20170203.11
T2  - Arabic Language, Literature & Culture
JF  - Arabic Language, Literature & Culture
JO  - Arabic Language, Literature & Culture
SP  - 49
EP  - 59
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2639-9695
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.allc.20170203.11
AB  - This paper addresses the phenomenon of dubbing foreign non-Arab media content, particularly melodramas, using Arabic colloquial varieties instead of the Standard language. It attempts to discover what dialect or variety is preferred most by the participants included, and if the choices made were driven by any suggested criterion. The sample is randomly formed through a mainly quantitative online questionnaire, including 279 participants from Saudi Arabia. A good number of the sample opted for the Standard language over the colloquial varieties, and when they had to choose one from the colloquial, they opted for the Syrian dialect. The strong affinity to the Turkish soap opera, which achieved its success through the Syrian dialect, seems to nourish a more positive attitude toward the Syrian dialect compared to other dialects used and provided by the study, such as the Khaleeji, Hijazi, and Egyptian dialects. However, with foreign dramas other than the Turkish, whatever the criterion behind selecting certain varieties for dubbing, the Standard comes in at first place, then the Syrian. That is, the Khaleeji with the Indian drama, and the Hijazi with Korean drama are not favoured by the participants. This latter finding is interesting, since the Khaleeji and Hijazi are the participants’ own dialects (or those closest to them), yet were rejected nonetheless.
VL  - 2
IS  - 3
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Elham Abdullah Ghobain

English Language Center, Jazan University, Jazan, Saudi Arabia

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Elham Abdullah Ghobain. (2017). Dubbing Melodramas in the Arab World; Between the Standard Language and Colloquial Dialects. Arabic Language, Literature & Culture, 2(3), 49-59. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.allc.20170203.11

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Elham Abdullah Ghobain. Dubbing Melodramas in the Arab World; Between the Standard Language and Colloquial Dialects. Arab. Lang. Lit. Cult. 2017, 2(3), 49-59. doi: 10.11648/j.allc.20170203.11

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Elham Abdullah Ghobain. Dubbing Melodramas in the Arab World; Between the Standard Language and Colloquial Dialects. Arab Lang Lit Cult. 2017;2(3):49-59. doi: 10.11648/j.allc.20170203.11

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.allc.20170203.11,
  author = {Elham Abdullah Ghobain},
  title = {Dubbing Melodramas in the Arab World; Between the Standard Language and Colloquial Dialects},
  journal = {Arabic Language, Literature & Culture},
  volume = {2},
  number = {3},
  pages = {49-59},
  doi = {10.11648/j.allc.20170203.11},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.allc.20170203.11},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.allc.20170203.11},
  abstract = {This paper addresses the phenomenon of dubbing foreign non-Arab media content, particularly melodramas, using Arabic colloquial varieties instead of the Standard language. It attempts to discover what dialect or variety is preferred most by the participants included, and if the choices made were driven by any suggested criterion. The sample is randomly formed through a mainly quantitative online questionnaire, including 279 participants from Saudi Arabia. A good number of the sample opted for the Standard language over the colloquial varieties, and when they had to choose one from the colloquial, they opted for the Syrian dialect. The strong affinity to the Turkish soap opera, which achieved its success through the Syrian dialect, seems to nourish a more positive attitude toward the Syrian dialect compared to other dialects used and provided by the study, such as the Khaleeji, Hijazi, and Egyptian dialects. However, with foreign dramas other than the Turkish, whatever the criterion behind selecting certain varieties for dubbing, the Standard comes in at first place, then the Syrian. That is, the Khaleeji with the Indian drama, and the Hijazi with Korean drama are not favoured by the participants. This latter finding is interesting, since the Khaleeji and Hijazi are the participants’ own dialects (or those closest to them), yet were rejected nonetheless.},
 year = {2017}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Dubbing Melodramas in the Arab World; Between the Standard Language and Colloquial Dialects
AU  - Elham Abdullah Ghobain
Y1  - 2017/07/13
PY  - 2017
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.allc.20170203.11
DO  - 10.11648/j.allc.20170203.11
T2  - Arabic Language, Literature & Culture
JF  - Arabic Language, Literature & Culture
JO  - Arabic Language, Literature & Culture
SP  - 49
EP  - 59
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2639-9695
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.allc.20170203.11
AB  - This paper addresses the phenomenon of dubbing foreign non-Arab media content, particularly melodramas, using Arabic colloquial varieties instead of the Standard language. It attempts to discover what dialect or variety is preferred most by the participants included, and if the choices made were driven by any suggested criterion. The sample is randomly formed through a mainly quantitative online questionnaire, including 279 participants from Saudi Arabia. A good number of the sample opted for the Standard language over the colloquial varieties, and when they had to choose one from the colloquial, they opted for the Syrian dialect. The strong affinity to the Turkish soap opera, which achieved its success through the Syrian dialect, seems to nourish a more positive attitude toward the Syrian dialect compared to other dialects used and provided by the study, such as the Khaleeji, Hijazi, and Egyptian dialects. However, with foreign dramas other than the Turkish, whatever the criterion behind selecting certain varieties for dubbing, the Standard comes in at first place, then the Syrian. That is, the Khaleeji with the Indian drama, and the Hijazi with Korean drama are not favoured by the participants. This latter finding is interesting, since the Khaleeji and Hijazi are the participants’ own dialects (or those closest to them), yet were rejected nonetheless.
VL  - 2
IS  - 3
ER  -

Copy | Download